Jump to content

Stop bringing non-service animals on ships


LMaxwell
 Share

Recommended Posts

Pets in restaurants is particularly disgusting.

 

We were in a restaurant once and a patron's dog took a dump on the floor smack bang in the middle of the place. Needless to say the patron ignored what had happened and, actually, so did all the wait staff.

 

Mrs BigWally and I were a bit "two sheets" on the local vin ordinaire by the time this happened, so actually found the whole thing completely hysterical, but I'm sure under different circumstances we'd have been completely grossed out. :halo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Service animals are not required to wear a vest and probably a lot of them that you see wearing a vest are the vest one can buy on line for their pet.

 

I just look at one of those sites and they say an eating disorder is a reason for a service dog..ha ha. Now, does the dog bark when they feel one has eaten to much or do they grab the food from their mouth....unbelievable that people will fall for anything.

 

I'm waiting for the first miniature horse on a cruise ship as per ADA rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know your a regular on these boards. And i don't wish to offend you. But, i don't find "your " dog cute. Of course i believe my dogs are the cutest, funniest, smartest most loyal dogs. And if you saw my 95lb longhaired german shepherd running straight at you, to give you one of his personal tongue baths. You would think "my" dog is not cute. a1e7353f24301e4a5e97bdf1fddbc1a5.jpg

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were in a restaurant once and a patron's dog took a dump on the floor smack bang in the middle of the place. Needless to say the patron ignored what had happened and, actually, so did all the wait staff.

You should have taken a picture of it and immediately called the health department.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is illegal under Federal law to ask for any type of documentation so that portion of Arizona law that you mentioned is illegal and unenforceable.

 

Below is a link to a very simple explanation of the ADA from the US Justice Department.

 

https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm

 

Note that the only legitimate Service Animals are Dogs and in some cases Miniature Horses. ESAs are not considered service dogs except for PTSD. Also, foreign countries have no responsibility to follow the ADA. I always find interesting that if you are allergic or are fearful of dogs, you lose.

 

These stores that are allowing animals in are basically doing it as a courtesy because they don't know the law or just don't want to be concerned about the consequences.

 

 

And this is what's wrong with this screwy system. If you are a disabled person - you are REQUIRED to display either a disabled license tag or a hanging tag in clear view of the public in order to park in a disabled parking spot or you will face a fine.

 

This "law" needs to be challenged in court and changed and, in several states, it already has been. This idea that a business or a cruise line are somehow "afraid" to ask for credentials for "emotional support" animals is ridiculous. Honestly, if you are in such a state that you cannot function without an animal - you probably shouldn't be venturing out into the public anyway. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this is what's wrong with this screwy system. If you are a disabled person - you are REQUIRED to display either a disabled license tag or a hanging tag in clear view of the public in order to park in a disabled parking spot or you will face a fine.

 

This "law" needs to be challenged in court and changed and, in several states, it already has been. This idea that a business or a cruise line are somehow "afraid" to ask for credentials for "emotional support" animals is ridiculous. Honestly, if you are in such a state that you cannot function without an animal - you probably shouldn't be venturing out into the public anyway. ;)

 

Two different things ES animals and service dogs. They can pretty much do what they wish for ES animals, have to follow the law with service dogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this is what's wrong with this screwy system. If you are a disabled person - you are REQUIRED to display either a disabled license tag or a hanging tag in clear view of the public in order to park in a disabled parking spot or you will face a fine.

 

This "law" needs to be challenged in court and changed and, in several states, it already has been. This idea that a business or a cruise line are somehow "afraid" to ask for credentials for "emotional support" animals is ridiculous. Honestly, if you are in such a state that you cannot function without an animal - you probably shouldn't be venturing out into the public anyway. ;)

 

Well, your understanding of the law is flawed. "Emotional Support Animals" are not covered under ADA, and are not granted the accessibility to public spaces that "Service Animals" are. ESA's are only protected under the "Fair Housing Act" and the "Air Carrier Access Act", so only for airlines and housing, not businesses and public areas.

 

Therefore, if someone states their dog is an ESA, it has no right to be in a business or restaurant, and the owner can remove them without any "documentation".

 

If the person states their dog is a Service Animal, the owner can ask what task the animal is trained to do. Over an above that, if the dog is ill behaved, as defined by the ADA, the business owner can also remove them without asking for documentation.

 

States do not have the right to change federal law.

 

The reason businesses are afraid to remove owners and their dogs is our system that allows suits to bebrought with little to no consequence to the plaintiff, yet the business owner who was excercising his/her legal rights under the ADA have to pay legal fees to defend their legal actions, so it is cheaper to ignore the animal. This is not a problem of the ADA, but with our legal system in general.

 

I hope your comment about "staying at home" was not aimed at those who need genuine service animals, or for those who need ESA's but who follow the law regarding their access to businesses.

 

And BTW, how many of those handicapped parking tags are fraudulent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My sentiments exactly! Thank you for posting this. I am sick to death of these inconsiderate owners who parade their pets around in strollers, take them in stores (any store is bad enough but grocery stores make me cringe), and "wear" them as accessories. I've come to realize that most of these pet owners are lacking something in their lives to act like this. I can guess that those that have children didn't even treat their kids the way they treat their dogs. Yuck:mad:

 

Since businesses are too afraid to do anything about this growing problem, I wish people would be respectful enough to STOP bringing their pets on ships. You do a major disservice to people who genuinely require the assistance of a trained support animal and already have enough struggle in life. Your "fur baby" that is not a trained service animal does not belong on the ship, period. If you are too cheap to pay for pet boarding, don't take a cruise. If you can't handle being apart from your pet, work out that issue. You may think it is cute to push your dog in a stroller or dress it in an outfit, but the rest of us laugh at you, not with you. The crew is there to provide services to guests, not to clean up after your pets. Please be considerate of those with genuine needs and other guests. It's okay to leave your dog home, they'll go plenty bonkers when you return anyways. Pets in restaurants is particularly disgusting. I am an animal lover but there is a time and place, and a cruise ship is wholly inappropriate for your pets.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One catch, per the ADA language someone else posted, is that one task a service animal may perform is calming someone with PTSD. Given that an establishment isn't permitted to ask about the particular disability there's a very fine line between ADA-permitted "calming" and an emotional support animal.

 

No wonder establishments choose to err on the side of permissiveness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One catch, per the ADA language someone else posted, is that one task a service animal may perform is calming someone with PTSD. Given that an establishment isn't permitted to ask about the particular disability there's a very fine line between ADA-permitted "calming" and an emotional support animal.

 

No wonder establishments choose to err on the side of permissiveness.

 

Well, actually, the PTSD dog performs specific tasks, individual to the person needing assistance, to do the "calming", such as steering the person from situations where the PTSD would manifest itself, keeping people from coming up behind the person, or signaling when the person's behavior is indicating an episode of PTSD. Per the wording of the ADA, an animal whose mere presence provides a calming effect on a person is not a service animal. So, yes, a business can ask what "task" the PTSD dog is trained to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, your understanding of the law is flawed. "Emotional Support Animals" are not covered under ADA, and are not granted the accessibility to public spaces that "Service Animals" are. ESA's are only protected under the "Fair Housing Act" and the "Air Carrier Access Act", so only for airlines and housing, not businesses and public areas.

 

Therefore, if someone states their dog is an ESA, it has no right to be in a business or restaurant, and the owner can remove them without any "documentation".

 

If the person states their dog is a Service Animal, the owner can ask what task the animal is trained to do. Over an above that, if the dog is ill behaved, as defined by the ADA, the business owner can also remove them without asking for documentation.

 

States do not have the right to change federal law.

 

The reason businesses are afraid to remove owners and their dogs is our system that allows suits to bebrought with little to no consequence to the plaintiff, yet the business owner who was excercising his/her legal rights under the ADA have to pay legal fees to defend their legal actions, so it is cheaper to ignore the animal. This is not a problem of the ADA, but with our legal system in general.

 

I hope your comment about "staying at home" was not aimed at those who need genuine service animals, or for those who need ESA's but who follow the law regarding their access to businesses.

 

And BTW, how many of those handicapped parking tags are fraudulent?

 

Like I said - this is what's wrong with this screwy system - someone, like yourself, defends someone carting their cute little Pomeranian through a grocery store restaurant and you ask "How many handicapped parking tags are fraudulent".

 

I rest my case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know your a regular on these boards. And i don't wish to offend you. But, i don't find "your " dog cute. Of course i believe my dogs are the cutest, funniest, smartest most loyal dogs. And if you saw my 95lb longhaired german shepherd running straight at you, to give you one of his personal tongue baths. You would think "my" dog is not cute. a1e7353f24301e4a5e97bdf1fddbc1a5.jpg

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

 

Got an 80 pound GSD of my own - she plays well with our 15 pound Dachshund.... ;p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said - this is what's wrong with this screwy system - someone, like yourself, defends someone carting their cute little Pomeranian through a grocery store restaurant and you ask "How many handicapped parking tags are fraudulent".

 

I rest my case.

 

The poster you quoted in no way defended anyone taking a dog through a store or restaurant. Case not rested or you quoted the wrong person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said before, people in Colorado bring their dogs everywhere. This is a new one [emoji23]

Winter Park was correct in keeping veteran’s service dog off chairlift, state Civil Rights Commission rules

https://www.denverpost.com/2018/01/15/winter-park-veteran-service-dog-chairlift-ruling/https://www.denverpost.com/2018/01/15/winter-park-veteran-service-dog-chairlift-ruling/

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I correct in thinking this would only be an issue on cruises departing from the US?

I cannot imagine those people who have non-essential dogs e.g. 'fur babies' etc going to the trouble of acquiring the correct documentation to import their animal to whichever country their cruise departs from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said - this is what's wrong with this screwy system - someone, like yourself, defends someone carting their cute little Pomeranian through a grocery store restaurant and you ask "How many handicapped parking tags are fraudulent".

 

I rest my case.

 

Please point out where I defended allowing a dog to be in a shopping cart. Please point out where I defended someone bringing a non-service dog into a business. A Pomeranian can be a trained service animal, trained to alert the owner when blood sugar levels drop dangerously. Generally this is caused by the dog detecting ketones in the owner's breath. For this reason, many of these dogs need to be close to the owner's face. The ADA, as I've posted before on this thread, and many others, only allows for service animals to be in two places, either on the floor, or in the owner's arms (for cases like the one I just mentioned). It does not allow for them to be in a shopping cart or a baby stroller.

 

I said, quite clearly, that businesses have the legal right to remove someone who claims their dog is an ESA, for any reason, and to remove a genuine service animal, if it is ill behaved. Other than that, I am in support of the law requiring businesses being required to accommodate service animals for those that need them. I would hope that should you ever need a mobility assistance device, whether it be a cane, walker, roller, wheelchair, or scooter, that you would never be denied access to businesses because of that usage, which is apparently what you are advocating, unless you haven't made your position clear.

 

I am not a fan of the aspect of the law that does not require registration or certification of service animals, but I do understand why it is there, a fully trained service animal can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Who pays for this? Do we deny someone a service dog that allows a person to live on their own because they cannot pay this? Or do we subsidize the service dog training industry? You tell me. My comment on fraudulent HC tags was to show that even if there would be a requirement to register or certify service animals, there can still be cases of fraud, just like with the HC tags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I correct in thinking this would only be an issue on cruises departing from the US?

I cannot imagine those people who have non-essential dogs e.g. 'fur babies' etc going to the trouble of acquiring the correct documentation to import their animal to whichever country their cruise departs from.

 

Well, for the Caribbean in general, all you need is an international vet certificate and a microchip in the dog to allow the dog into the country. Not everywhere is as strict as the UK or the EU on dog importation restrictions. But, also, I don't believe that there are many, if any, laws in the EU requiring businesses to give access to service animals, so it would be up to each business (or cruise ship) to set their own requirements. In the UK, businesses are required to make "reasonable exemptions" to their policies (like no dogs) for service animals, but cannot deny services based on the person's use of a service animal, per the Equality Act (as I see it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One catch, per the ADA language someone else posted, is that one task a service animal may perform is calming someone with PTSD. Given that an establishment isn't permitted to ask about the particular disability there's a very fine line between ADA-permitted "calming" and an emotional support animal.

 

No wonder establishments choose to err on the side of permissiveness.

It needs to be a bit more than "calming" to meet the standard as a service animal. Sitting to be petted is not sufficubent. The dog has to perform an actual task like getting the phone, pressing their head against the owner's chest, licking their hand, getting meds, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironically, cruise lines fought against ADA compliance citing that their ships are foreign flagged. I am not sure if cruise ships in 2018 are required to meet the same compliance for ADA as land based businesses in the United States. Does anyone know that status?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironically, cruise lines fought against ADA compliance citing that their ships are foreign flagged. I am not sure if cruise ships in 2018 are required to meet the same compliance for ADA as land based businesses in the United States. Does anyone know that status?

 

Under the SCOTUS ruling in "Spector v NCL", while cruise ships need to make "reasonable" changes or designs to allow access onboard, changes to older ships that would require major redesign of the ship, or that would violate SOLAS are not required, which is why some older ships still have areas that are not considered accessible by ADA standards. And the court ruled that the cruise lines could not discriminate against selling cabins to those with disabilities. Finally, the court ruled that in areas that apply to the ship's "internal policies and procedures", the ADA does not apply. The court held that without specific mention of foreign flag cruise ships, that the ADA would have to take a back seat in the areas of "internal policies and procedures" to "international comity". The court said that until Congress changes the wording of the ADA to include specific mention of foreign flag cruise ships, their status would not change. Congress has yet to act.

 

The only cruise vessels that are fully ADA compliant are NCL's POA, American Cruise Line's small coastal ships, and the US river cruise boats. Look at Viking Ocean, where they do not allow mobility scooters or power chairs onboard. They do not discriminate (they allow mobility disabled onboard), but their "internal policy" limits those to manual wheelchairs.

 

My personal take on the "internal policies and procedures" finding is that the handling of service animals, onboard, (not whether they are allowed on or not) falls under these "internal policies" and that CLIA should promulgate a "service animal code of conduct" much like the lines already have for human guests, and that any violation of this code could result in disembarkation. This would, of course, lead to a legal action the first time it is implemented, and no line wants to be the one to take on the cost of this, let alone the bad PR when the media spins this to a public who doesn't understand international maritime law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone noticed that CATS are not an issue here?

 

At least (it seems) that cat owners have sense/consideration enough to leave their "fur babies" at home. Although my 22lb. orange tabby (Haines) would probably enjoy a cruise; he loves everyone & all the attention he can get. He is my "emotional support animal" but we both know where he does NOT belong.

 

And, yes, I'm a dog person too. In my younger adulthood I've had an Old English Sheepdog, a Collie & 3 Newfoundlands -- BIG hairy dogs who shed (LOTS) and definitely don't belong in a restaurant, much less a cruise ship!

 

Service dogs are wonderful, well-trained, and a living medical tool for their people. It's a total shame that irresponsible people & their untrained pets tarnish the term "service dog".

 

 

Could it be that cat owners don’t have more consideration or common sense than dog owners, but that cats typically are more standoffish? Maybe some aren’t as attached to their cats as people are with dogs.

Often dogs greet you excitedly and are always looking for human interaction. I have had cats and dogs all my life and cats not as much. It’s on their terms when and if they want attention. On any given day my dogs tend to stay by my side unless they’re outside playing in the backyard. I can count on seeing my cat first thing in the morning when she’s hungry to eat, many days that’s about the end of it. She may want some attention here and there but definitely not on a consistent or daily basis like the dogs.

 

Also cats you could potentially leave alone with some food and water and they would be fine for a couple days if litter box trained. Can’t do that with dogs. Dogs also are typically more disciplined. Most people with a little work can get any dog to follow simple instructions and be obedient. Try that with a cat… Just doesn’t work the same. Possibly the difference is you couldn’t take most cats out in public with you and them cooperate and behave like a dog would.

 

With that said I’m in full agreement that people shouldn’t abuse this. It’s meant for those with disabilities that need their service animal.

 

I love my dogs and I worry about them when I’m on vacation, but I would never take them with me. I don’t think they would enjoy it anymore than all the other people who don’t love my dogs would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed two dogs on our last cruise on Oasis of the Seas. That's the first time I've ever seen one on a ship. How do you know if they're service animals or not? These were two little "frilly" dogs, no service animal vest on them.

 

Service animals are not required to wear a vest. If the dog is with one owner one day, and the other owner another, then its not a service animal. If the dog is not on the floor or being carried by the owner, its not a service animal. If the dog is distracted from the owner by sights or sounds, it's not a service animal. If the animal growls or barks (not signaling the owner), it's not a service animal. If it is so self-effacing that you hardly know its there, it is a service animal. Size or breed have nothing to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. They can't discriminate against a person with a service animal.

 

Royal should simply add a $250 cleaning deposit to all guests, refundable after the trip. Tie that to a guest conduct and responsibility policy. If a pet does its business outside of provided areas you forfeit the cleaning deposit and if it continues to happen you could be put off the ship. For a genuine service animal that is trained to use provided relief areas this will not be any issue. But for the self-entitled who let their dogs crap anywhere and make the crew clean up, they'll forfeit their $250. May make them think again about bringing a pet onboard when they have no genuine need.

 

For a $250 fee, I would gladly bring my dog with me on a cruise. Sure is cheaper than paying for a dog sitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...